What is a moped?

The scariest part of being an insutructor (several years ago) was
sometimes having to ride the pupils tiny-wheeled twist-n-go home for
them because they couldn't face Bournemouths busiest roundabout at 1pm
on a Saturday. Scary because of the twitchy handling and the fact that I
*always* tried to use the back brake as a clutch.

I have immense respect for anybody who can ride a scotter with small
wheels properly.

 

Sorry, I disagree. The very fact that it can be interpreted differently is
evidence of it being poorly worded.

I also disagree with your interpretation.

 

People treat cyclists differently so it isn't quite the same.

 

Is that like halfway between a scooter and a snotter?

 

I'll see your disagreement and raise you a contradiction.

 

No, it's something that used to be endorsed by the Bay City Rollers.
The horns went "Shang-a-lang".

 

Poorly read, I think.

Your problem, not mine. I assure you that a post-1977 tuned-for-60mph
50cc bike would _not_ count as a moped in any legal sense. You wanna
argue the toss, go right ahead, but I won't bother reading it.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2
`\|/`
`

 

I've only really noticed post from you in two threads, this one and
the holiday one, and you're coming across as a right wanker. Sorry for
pointing it out and further apologies if I'm alone in the way I'm
thinking.

 

You are not alone.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2
`\|/`
`

 

Andy

No problem. I'm aware that that is the impression people seem to have and
I'm not entirely sure why. All I'm doing is expressing an opinion on things
but seem to be doing it in a way that upsets people.

The moped thread was an attempt to have a discussion on this issue but the
minute I disagree with a regular I seem to cause offence.

If anyone cares to point out where I'm going wrong I'm very happy to listen.

 

Just agree with everybody.

 

Learn to stop arguing when you've lost. It's easy and makes for a lot
less futile posts from all parties concerned.

Try discussing from a flexible viewpoint and you'll notice a
difference. I wouldn't worry about the 'regular poster' bit because
that counts for next to **** all around here. Everybody gets trampled
on if they come across as being wrong no matter who they are.

It's worth remembering that this group has a wide range of posters and
you'll find someone knowledgeable in most fields if you wait long
enough.

Read other posts before replying to the first one.

 

On the moped thing; as one or two have said, if you tune it, you become
the designer of the performance, hence its 'design speed' is not as it
was when it left the factory. Now, most of the time you'd be perfectly
ok riding around on something like that, and I'm of the opinion that
mopeds restricted to 30mph are nothing short of a dangerous liability on
the roads - dangerous to the rider and dangerous to other users.

The problem with the law arises if you attract the attention of plod -
if they happen to see or measure you at >30mph, it becomes obvious to
plod that the machine is exceeding its 'design speed' by some margin and
they *may* take it further.

 

That was part of my thrust. It would have been easy to say not capable of
exceeding 30mph but they didn't.

What happens when you go downhill? Whether the legislation says 'no more
tham 30mph' or 'designed to do no more than 30mph' it still doesan't cope
with the fact you will do 35mph.

 

Andrew998 wrote

The bars wobble and they fall off?

 

I think you are right but I still don't see how the wording covers it. It
would be expensive but it wouldn't be impossible to design a bike that did
no more than 30mph in any circumstances (e.g. electronic speed control). A
definition along the lines of 'no more than 30mph in still air with a 140lb
rider' might start to address it.

 

Andrew998 wrote:
A definition along the lines of 'no more than 30mph in still air with
a 140lb

I don't think the rider weight will alter the top speed much.
Acceleration yes, but aerodynamics and power will be the main factors

--
Nick Brooks

2001 SV650
2005 GN125 ('till test passed)
1960 SWB SII Landrover
1974 Mercedes Hanomag Camper Van
1997 Golf VR6
Combined vehicle age 88

 

You do realise you're actually spelt with a Z? I was there at the dawn
of the Third Age of Mankind, I know these things.

 

No. If the plod is feeling bloody-minded enough, he can take it further.

As I said up there ^^^, I'm totally in favour of giving the little
fuckers more speed anyway; makes them much safer, imo.

 

You must be looking at the wrong mopeds. A Gilera may be restricted to 2bhp
but every Honda moped I've looked at is designed with 2hp and requires some
serious porting to get any more.